Methylstenbolone Explained

I couldn't help but notice that the recent sales pitch Methylstenbolone Explainedby Mike Arnold (found here and here) borrows heavily (indeed almost exclusively) from original work of mine (found here, among other places), work to which I own the exclusive intellectual copyright.

I am not unreasonable, I am willing to let the plagiarism go, if you would be willing to correctly attribute the source of the work, and wherever the advert is published, to provide a link to my own site. Please contact me by PM to work out the finer details.

In 1966, researchers at Searle Laboratories set about methodically testing the myotrophic (anabolic) and androgenic effects of a series of A-ring modified androstane derivatives [2]. The compounds they explored reads like a who's who of designer steroids.
Methyl-1-testosterone (M1T), desoxymethyltestosterone (phera), 17a-methyl-1-androstenediol (Alpha One), and a variety of other 1- and 2-dehydro compounds were explored for activity.

Originally Posted by Mike Arnold

In 1966 M-Sten was researched by Searle Laboratories, along with several other compounds; several of which have become well known in the OTC designer steroid world. Some of the steroids included in this research were Desoxymethyltestosterone (Pheraplex), Methyl-1-Testosterone (M1T), and 17a-methyl-1-androstenediol (M1-Alpha).

Originally Posted by henryv

The researchers proudly announced that "Even the least active compound in Table 6 possessed a higher relative myotrophic potency than previously has been obtained with several clinically interesting compounds which have been studied under identical conditions, i.e. oxymetholone, oxandrolone, stanozolol, and methandrostenolone." (anadrol, anavar, winstrol, and dianabol).

Originally Posted by Mike Arnold

The results of this comparison were shocking, with the researchers commenting that “Even the least active compound in Table 6 (see below) possessed a higher relative myotropic (muscle-building) potency than previously has been obtained with several clinically interesting compounds, which have been studied under identical conditions, i.e. Oxymetholone (Anadrol), Oxandrolone (Anavar), Stanozolol (Winstrol), and Methandrostenolone (Dianabol).”

As you can see from the table above, methyl sten has somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 the anabolic activity of methyl-1-testosterone

Originally Posted by Mike Arnold

As you can see by the chart above, M-Sten is over 2/3rd as myotropic as M1T, per mg.

Originally Posted by henryv

Structurally resembling the bastard child of M1T and superdrol,

Originally Posted by Mike Arnold

Structurally, M-Sten is an amalgamation between SD & M1T,

Originally Posted by henryv

Since it's DHT-derived, aromatisation is impossible. 5a-reduction is also impossible, since it's already 5a-reduced.

Originally Posted by Mike Arnold

In accordance with other DHT derivatives, M-Sten also lacks the ability to aromatize to any degree, nor is it capable of 5a-reduction.

Originally Posted by henryv

Recommended Dosages and Cycle Durations:

These will be formed by the weight of public opinion after enough logs have been recorded. The only confirmed product on the market to contain this compound comes in 4mg caps and recommends dosing at two caps per day, and not to exceed three caps per day. It is likely in my opinion that the "standard dosing" will end up significantly higher (20mg+).

Originally Posted by Mike Arnold

In terms of dosing recommendations, the jury is still out, as it is still to new for enough users to have provided feedback sufficient to come to any definitive conclusions. None the less, based on the dosing recommendations of similar steroids, it is highly likely that the ideal dosing range will end up somewhere between 20-30 mg/day.

I wonder if this is H*** I*** , he's copied stuff I said before. (as his own)

I'm not Mike Arnold if that's what you are wondering. PM me any links of anything I have ever copied from you that I claimed was my own brother. I would be happy to give you credit but I honestly don't know of any such cases.

Btw, I'm a fan of henryv's work. Love his research. I hope he and Mike can work things out.

Well, I don't know if it was intentional or not, it could of been from some stuff i ghost wrote for pp, it was a long time ago, I just remember reading the dimethazine profile and being like, those are my exact words. (not the whole thing, just pieces)